If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Interpreted code vs GPL clarification

My case is pretty much identical to Blender/Blender Game Engine. Blender has got a python api(bpy) which is used to implement plugins and games. Blender source is GPL and Blender is linking against GPL libraries afaik. They have got an exception for scripts, stating that they are not affected by the GPL. Is this actually possible?

FSF FAQ:

The interpreted program, to the interpreter, is just data

when the interpreter is extended to provide “bindings” to other facilities (often, but not necessarily, libraries), the interpreted program is effectively linked to the facilities it uses through these bindings.

So the same issue might affect compiled code too? Let's say you have got a generic API where one certain implementation is based on GPL code, see Blender or the hypothetic Flash class libraries. In general you can not know how the API is implemented. Would the GPL apply to you if you are linking against the API?

AFAIK it's pretty clear-cut if you statically link against the GPL implementation. Where it gets interesting is when your program dynamically links to the library and there are both GPL and non-GPL implementations of that library which can be used interchangeably... at that point you get into murky "who owns the API ?" questions.

I don't think anyone is going to argue that the mere existence of a GPL implementation of a pre-existing API "taints" that API, but then again I do get surprised by what people argue some times